I think this is useful and succinct contribution to the process.
Well done Erica!
A few issues which spring to mind, quite possibly partisan.
o Lumping ISOC-AU/ACA/TRADEGATE/IIA together as 'industry bodies' looks
rather odd. The differences between the organizations might be overstated
but there are differences of view, approach and intent. If I can make
an analogy, if poacher-turned-gamekeeper is a problem in this area, then
putting the pheasant-workers union alongside the butchers trade association,
the gunmakers society and the animal rights campaigners would be considered
distinctly unusual. If the collected nexus only get to vote for a share
of seats, you're implying that they can agree who can represent their
interests, and risking that one sector looses out significantly in
representation.
o If we take your strawman figure of $5 per domain as a levy as a case in
point, I think you should *also* show how not applying this in .id.au
.org.au and .edu.au changes the revenue outcomes. Having said that, I
think that if "free" domainspaces have to encompass a fee for maintenance
of a central registry, and if that is the ONLY levy they pay, then the
central concept of "freedom" has only been eroded, not destroyed. Of course
I am personally committed to these domains remaining free-to-air but at
the moment is subject to the whim of the delegate/registry and not innate.
o I think stressing public interest was a very very good thing. well done!
o You don't directly mention new 2LD. I think this is a very very good thing
and I suggest people stick to completely decoupling the question of a need
for new domains from global domain management.
o You don't mention any participation by government longterm which I think is
a bad thing. Self-Regulation does not mean the absolving of a real
governance process of all responsibility. Without participation of at least
some arm of federal government, its going to be hard to see DNS policy
sigue cleanly into an emerging Federal Government national I/T policy
framework. Then there is the question of fed and state legislative need
(if any) which has been posited in connection with title claim, Intellectual
Property rights, and legal indemnity for people operating under the
self regulatory framework. I don't ask for a government seat on the board,
but an indication of what arm of federal government will liaise ongoing,
and an analogous indication that state-level people are aware there will
be a national body in this area, and respect its role would help.
o I think you need to mention if briefly that IANA/ICANN have some level
of oversight in the transition from KRE to a body.
cheers
-George